Atheists don't need faith

[EdithSimcox]

Atheists don't need faith

Lots of interesting things here including:

• nearly half of us are non-religious but less than a fifth are atheist...
• atheists need "simply more than can be proved by logic and science"

Any thoughts? A view I've often seen expressed on MN is that logic and science are the end of the subject.

Haven t got time to read whole thread but just to let you know Spinnaker, you're not alone in your thoughts.
I know I ve said it once but I m saying it again to all people with faith - read Matthew 5 v 11.
Enjoy the sunshine everyone.

What intrigues me is that more atheists believe in aliens than do religious folk. (55% of atheists versus, for example, 32% of Christians)

opentheword.org/2014/10/03/the-majority-of-atheists-have-faith-after-all-they-believe-in-aliens/

Do atheists need their own thing to be credulous about? Have they been geeking out in front of the telly watching too many episodes of Star Trek?

I like to think that what the atheists who took part in the survey mean is that they believe in the possibility of aliens - but who knows?!

I agree awhfuck, but that is not the question asked in the survey.

Sunnyspot- It is quite outrageous that you apply that particular text to the discussion on this thread.

I actually feel I've done quite a lot of indulging!

And the more I think about it, the more upset I am by sunnyspot's post.

Today 11:04 NotDavidTennant

No I'm not. I'm not trying to place atheism anywhere, just noting something that seems contradictory about some of the arguments

My apologies then, because your entire post seemed based on the idea that atheism was an end point to be arrived at, similar to religious belief.

While I generally agree with this point, I don't like the general tendency on this thread to assert that people are born believing or not believing X or Y. This is surely something to be determined empirically by developmental psychology, isn't it?

I think there's an important distinction between being predisposed to believe in things - cf the evolutionary psychology of belief mentioned earlier in the thread - and what people are taught to believe. There is good evidence that children learn to believe in what their family/culture teaches them to believe.

No one has ever asked me to provide the rational justification for my lack of belief in ghosts or unicorns.

But presumably you can give one.

Yep. There is no evidence for their existence, therefore the most likely explanation is that they are a construct of the human imagination.

"Mostly they treat it as a natural state of being - given lack of evidence of their existence, I do not need to have made a rational decision not to believe in ghosts or unicorns."

But how did you come to the knowledge there is no evidence for ghosts or unicorns? Was that something you were born instinctively knowing? Or you were brought up to believe? Or is it something you've arrived at through your own reason?

Your assertion that there is no evidence implies that you have actually engaged in a rational assessment of the evidence, doesn't it?

I wasn't engaging in a summation. Why not try assuming I'm making a point in good faith instead of imagining I'm trying to engage in some kind of "gotcha" against atheism.

You summarised, incorrectly and sloppily, points made by others. Perhaps we define 'summation' differently - but I was wondering why you missed out the nuances (which were hard to miss as they'd been repeated quite often) to the point of misrepresentation.

Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me. Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you.

Asking for evidence isn't quite the same as insulting, persecuting and saying falsehoods is it?

I'm sure when the Christians were fending off the lions they had a bit more to worry about than someone disagreeing with them on Mumsnet

Plus it's a tad rude seeing as we've all been so patient.

I agree awhfuck, but that is not the question asked in the survey

What was the question ask? I've spent a while trying to find the source survey but all I can find is reporting of it in publications not known for good scientific reporting.

On the available evidence and balance of probabilities I think it's likely that life exists on other planets in the universe, given the millions of Goldilocks planets in existence.

I don't think that it is at all surprising that fewer Christians are open to this as it is in conflict with the idea that the Christian God created humans as special and unique, above all other life forms.

www.openminds.tv/survey-examines-if-belief-in-god-effects-belief-in-extraterrestrials-video-1151/23878

Jassy here is a link.

I am an atheist too and I agree with the sentiment that there is probably extraterrestrial life out there but I am not certain so I don't feel I can say I believe in it. I would say that I don't know but I regard it as a strong possibility. In the survey it was possible to opt for not knowing.

I'm actually feeling quite excited by the recent discovery of planets outside the solar system, including those with earth-like features.

Thanks! That's a pretty badly designed survey that looks like it was designed to drive headlines not insight. (This is an area where I have a fair bit of expertise - I know picking on surveys is a popular way to undermine an argument one disagrees with and I'm usually in there defending the data, but I'm not loving this one.)

It depends on what people understand by belief I guess - and that will vary by individuals. For a lot of respondents it may well have been a question of 'I think their existence is more likely than not / highly likely so I guess I choose yes'. I can't honestly say how I'd answer such a question if I came to it cold.

And that's the problem with using a loaded word like 'believe' in a study that correlates views on extra terrestrial life with religiousness, particularly when giving only Y/N/IDK options.

I agree with that Jassy. As I said up thread I hope that the atheists responding to the survey meant that they believed in the possibility of extra terrestrial life but it's impossible to know. Absolutely, the survey question could have been worded better.

Sorry that was a bit ranty wasn't it. I work in a business driven by data on public behaviour so bad data is a bugbear.

I agree too, on what you hope.

Jassy

I don't think this is a topic that is likely to generate research that appears in serious peer-reviewed scientific literature. So you end up trying to interpret whatever information's been made available, even if there is a lack of rigour in the conception of the research.

Oh yes, but market research companies (should) know better. You could have got much better quality data for very marginally more cost from the exact same survey.

I think there needs to be some semantic examination surrounding the words believe and faith.
i believe the sun will rise tomorrow, that that does not constitute a faith or religion.

Statistics need to be questioned.
Of all the people I know enough to know their religious beliefs, ( 100 or so) only 3 or 4 are christian.
I do know loads on "nominal christians"- I was brought up in such a family.
When the census form arrived my parents would tick the "caucasian, christian " box.
It's a default position. we didn't have a bible in the home, I was never taken to church, no prayers or religious instruction at home.
But we were classed as a christian family.
Huge swathes of society are fence sitters. having been brought us with a mild indoctrination ( usually at school), that the idea of god becomes the default position.

Huge swathes of society are fence sitters. having been brought us with a mild indoctrination ( usually at school), that the idea of god becomes the default position

I very much agree with this. And there is good evidence that the data obtained in the census is flawed as the question 'what is your religion' has an inherent bias towards having a religion as the default, and therefore funnels people into the option that is the best cultural fit - which is the only way you can reconcile the Census data with every other survey on religiousness and belief in deities.

"I believe the sun will rise tomorrow, that that does not constitute a faith or religion"
Absolutely. This is how I define my atheism- and why I don't call myself an agnostic, even though technically that is all we can be. Although we can't prove a negative, the chances of the sun not rising or God proving to exist are so small as to not be worth considering.

And incidentally, another survey, carried out by the National Secular Society not long after the Census showed, I think, 46% of the population as having a religious faith.

Which is still well above the surveys that repeatedly show that under 40% believe in a deity. I'm always intrigued by who's in that category of 'Christian (or other religion) but don't think there's a God'.